Paul Ryan Quotes

When it comes to international trade, the question is, who is going to write the rules, the United States or China? And my vote is the United States.

We aren't leveraging this great economic engine, the strongest economy in the world. And yet we have this totally weak response. We import $500 billion a year more in products than we export.

The question is therefore not whether there will be globalization but how much and what kind, carried out through what means and according to what rules.

America wins when we trade and export and import.

I think because we're such a trading nation, I think Canadians understand that first and foremost we're part of the global economy.

The trade deficit is the capital surplus and don't ever think of having a capital surplus as being a bad thing for our country.

The North American Free Trade Agreement marked a fundamental change in the global trade scheme.

When America closes its doors, so does everybody else. We are the primary engine of growth in the world and we are the only beacon of free trade left, and open markets.

Nonetheless, the developing countries must be able to reap the benefits of international trade.

Most globalism opposition groups believe “that the foreign trade policy- making process was undemocratic and that it elevated global concerns over domestic ones.” Non-elected bureaucrats working largely behind closed doors were responsible for setting international trade rules that affected agriculture, services, trade-related investment measures, intellectual trade in goods; and over-saw a binding international dispute settlement process with little (if any) input from the domestic citizens and groups who would be affected by these economic rules and political mechanisms.

There is no way out of playing by the rules of the international economy if you wish to be a part of it.

The popular notion is that imports are bad and exports are good.

Geo-economics may replace geo-politics as the driving force in international relations.

All Nations endeavor to get the [foreign] Exchange as much as they can on their side.

Trade never balances. It hasn’t since 1776.

We have at last awakened to the realization that foreign and domestic trade are not in separate water-tight compartments--that they flow through the same pipes and seek a common level. We cannot live by ourselves, shut off from the balance of the world, without working harm to our economic system that would require many years for repair.

International economic cooperation has delivered benefits to the United States and other countries that would have been impossible to attain otherwise.

If the U.S. fails to set the rules for global trade, then other countries with records of environmental and labor abuses, like China, will step in to fill the void.

The chief job of foreign policy today is helping to figure out the rules for the global economy and defending each nation's interests within it.

If China sets the rules for much of the world's economy, America will feel the consequences in our pocketbooks as well as in our security.

We want more of our products going overseas, but the trick is to have a level playing field.

If the two largest economies in the world don't show us a good example on trade liberalization, then you can't expect the smaller and weaker economies to take the risks. The initiative, the momentum and the drive really do have to come from Japan and the U.S.

We cannot talk about trade without talking about China.

Our engagement through international economics, trade, these trade agreements, is vital and is linked to our national security. This is a lesson we learned from the '30s, it is a lesson we learned post-World War II, and it plays to our strengths.

Old ideas of not trading because 'they won't open their markets to us' miss the entire point of allowing goods to be imported into the United States - because we want and need them and because someone here believes that the good or service received in exchange for our dollars creates value for them.